The Help

OPENING: 08/10/2011

STUDIO: Dreamworks Films

RUN TIME: 103 min

ACCOMPLICES:
Trailer, Official Site

The Charge
Change begins with a whisper

Opening Statement
In 2009, the book The Help was released and spent more then 100 weeks on bestseller lists. It chronicled the fictional stories of Aibileen Clark, a poor African American lady who worked for rich, white families in Jackson, Mississippi in the early 1960s. The book was written by Kathryn Stockett, a Caucasian lady who was inspired by an African American maid who worked for her family when she was a child. This, of course, drew lots of controversy. (What would she know about the experiences she’s writing about? Would this book and movie have gotten the same backing if a black person wrote it?) All of which goes to show that questions of racial equality are still alive and well today, and though we have an African American in the White House we still have not only a lot of callous people…but also a lot of exposed nerves.

Facts of the Case
The Help tells the story of three women who build unlikely friendships around a secret writing project which, if found out, would put them all in great danger. The unfortunately named Eugenia “Skeeter” Phelan (played by Emma Stone in Shirley Temple curls) wants a career writing. When she lands a job writing a cleaning tips column for the local paper she seeks help from Aibileen (played by Viola Davis in a performance I hope will get her an Oscar nomination) her best friend’s maid. Along with Aibileen’s best friend Minny (Octavia Spencer) they begin to tell Skeeter their stories about what it’s like being a maid in Jackson Mississippi.

The Evidence
As this is a Dreamworks film (and therefore, a Disney film) it has all the spit and polish sheen you would expect, full of morals and morsels of quaint truths lying around for the picking. That’s not to say that it isn’t good, because I think it is. That’s to say that they played it very safe with the material they were given. This isn’t The Color Purple. Heck, this isn’t even Driving Miss Daisy. An incident of spousal abuse is played out off screen and racial fuelled violence is heard over the radio. This is a piece of art finely tuned so that it would not offend anyone.

This film passes the Bechdel Test (look it up)–not something I can type often so I take the chance when I can. Though most of the women in this film are portrayed as gossipy, bitter, shallow minded hens; it makes it that much easier to delineate the goodies from the baddies. The performances are the reason to see this film, especially Viola Davis whose courageous acting–filmed in unflattering ways if it is in favor of the character–anchors this movie and really punches up the film’s most heartfelt moments. Her eyes can convey all the sadness in the world. Emma Stone’s Skeeter is the typical girl ahead of her time; the types put into these kinds of movies so that we can laugh at the backwards thinking of people at that time and pat ourselves on the back because we’ve come so far. What? She doesn’t want to be married? She doesn’t care about having children? Instead she wants a career and finds people of a different race to actually be people and not chattel? Scandal!

Jessica Chastain (most recently seen in Malick’s Tree of Life) is a revelation in this role as Celia Foote, the girl who lives in the outskirts of town and is shunned by all the socialites. She had quite a bit of heavy lifting to do, her character had to take some on-a-dime turns and Jessica more then succeeded. Side Note: Did the casting directors purposefully go after all the redheads (Stone, Howard, Chastain) in Hollywood? If so, Julianne Moore and Amy Adams are still waiting for their auditions.

Closing Statement
There are a couple of storytelling missteps. The film begins in the middle of the story with Aibileen already telling Skeeter her stories though the first act is Skeeter trying to convince Aibileen to tell her stories, which kinda takes the suspenseful wind out of your sails. Then there’s a subplot of Skeeter’s boyfriend which felt a little tacked on and ended very abruptly. That said, what the story did very well is convey the equality of all people. There were, as there are today, people on both sides of the racial divide who are mean and rude and spiteful. Just as there were, and still are today, people whose feelings are hurt because a mean, rude and/or spiteful person, regardless of race, age, creed or conviction, did not understand that hate affects everyone equally.

The Verdict

8/10

The Charge
This is what love feels like.

Opening Statement
Listeners of the F This Movie podcast may have heard my DVD Verdict colleagues’ defense of the ambitious failure. Those movies try to do something different because they come from an artistic vision rather than a marketing committee, and sometimes the results aren’t successful. I admire movies that are different too, which is why Beginners inspires mixed feelings for me. There are many endearingly unique touches but here’s a case where the sum of the parts don’t add up to a satisfying viewing experience.

Facts of the Case
Oliver (Ewan McGregor, The Ghost Writer) is clearing out the personal effects of his late father, Hal (Christopher Plummer, The Last Station). Through a series of flashbacks, Oliver recalls his father’s last four years as a just-out-of-the-closet gay widower who lived it up until succumbing to cancer. In the present, depressed Oliver meets a French actress named Anna (Mélanie Laurent, Inglourious Basterds) at a costume party. Can she snap him out of his emotional stupor?

The Evidence
Writer-director Mike Mills (Thumbsucker) shows that he has a handle on maintaining mood. The look and the sound of the movie reflect Oliver’s emotional numbness in the aftermath of his father’s death. The streets seem a little emptier and the world is much quieter than it has been before. It’s a daring move to keep up this down beat atmosphere for the entirety of the movie, especially for a romance. However, after spending about 20 minutes in Oliver’s world, it loses its appeal. His sadness isn’t oppressive enough to be interesting and there aren’t enough glimmers of hope to suggest this mood will improve. There isn’t a strong narrative drive to bring Oliver back to the world of the living, the movie just wallows in his sadness.

The movie rests heavily on Oliver’s emotional state, which is manifest in his work and his words. A cartoonist, presumably, he is drawing a series that details the history of sadness. It’s a high-concept work that he wants to sell to a band called The Sads for their CD release. We also hear Oliver chronicle his own history (and that of his parents) through a series of sequences edited in a collage manner — seemingly random images that share a connection — and almost clinically narrated. “This is 2003. This is what the sun looks like. This is what the sun looked like in 1955. That was the year my parents got married,” Oliver states in a cold monotone. These moments, with some lovely musical assistance, suggest something powerful and profound will be revealed in their starkness. These scenes are among the most effective in the movie and they work well in short bursts. There is some rough poetry being conjured in these moments and the rest of the movie can’t quite match it.

The always-reliable Ewan McGregor gives an interesting, if oddly distracting, performance here. Speaking in an American accent that is so forcefully neutral it sounds unnatural, McGregor’s Oliver invites so much pity that you may want to look away. Even in situations where he’s supposed to pretend to be cheerful, he can’t look anything but sad. “Why are you at a party if you’re so sad?” Anna asks at their precious initial encounter. Yet, she sees enough in him to offer a pity relationship.

There is one scene where Oliver and Anna act like a happy couple. That occurs at a roller rink where an employee tells them they can’t bring a dog into the building. What can they do then? Leave the premises still wearing their rental roller skates, of course. This moment when the pair refuses to comply with society’s rules is the one time that I thought they were having fun together and maybe were in love. The rest of their time together shows no emotional connection and no chemistry. There is a moment, borrowed from many better quirky romances, when they ponder their future together and accept that they don’t know what is next for them. It’s supposed to be a hopeful statement but Oliver and Anna don’t earn it. There is nothing to suggest they should be together except for the urging of the script.

Hal’s coming out is secondary to Oliver’s sadness. Whatever has changed about their relationship is very subtle and Oliver appears to have next to no reaction to his father being gay. Hal comes off as a cute cartoon of a gay man, his fashion sense stalled in the 1960s and his awareness of gay culture some years behind the curve. His lover is an angry gay man who takes every opportunity to remind us he’s entitled to the same treatment as everyone else even though no one in the movie is disrespecting him. The flashback chronicle of Hal’s final years provides a temporal framework for the movie but to what end? We always see Oliver observing his father and hardly ever engaged in his life. When all is revealed, really nothing has changed. Oliver does not have a revelation by remembering his father. In the end, he’s the same sad sack as at the movie’s start and he may want to be with Anna or maybe not.

The most intriguing character of the entire movie is Oliver’s mother, Georgia (Mary Page Keller, Gigantic), seen in flashbacks with her preteen son. In just a few scenes, she conveys dignity, complexity, loneliness, and love. You can see her frustration in her marriage but she has a lovely bond with Oliver. It is the movie’s big missed opportunity that Georgia isn’t given more attention and screen time.

Closing Statement
Beginners does a good job of portraying the state of sadness. The protagonist’s emotional withdrawal from the world and the conspicuously quiet nature of his world are well observed. However, the movie never moves past merely observing Oliver’s sadness. Consequently, I felt no connection to the character or any investment in his relationship with Anna. Director Mills puts in some nice offbeat touches like the collage-edited sequences I mentioned above. I didn’t care so much for the Jack Russell terrier that communicates through subtitles which seems like a deliberate effort to insert cuteness into a movie that’s already too self-conscious of its quirkiness. The movie falls short of delivering what’s promised by the poster’s tagline, “This is what love feels like,” and, after reading that, the little bit of throw-up in your mouth isn’t meant to be what love tastes like either.

The Verdict
5/10

Super 8

OPENING: 06/10/2011

STUDIO: Paramount Pictures

RUN TIME: 112 min

ACCOMPLICES:
Trailer, Official Site

The Charge
From J.J. Abrams and Steven Spielberg.

Opening Statement
After adding a solid installment to the popular Mission: Impossible franchise and successfully re-booting the Star Trek franchise, writer/director/producer/generally beloved media figure J.J. Abrams finally gets to tackle an original story with Super 8. Steven Spielberg is the film’s executive producer, and it quickly becomes clear that Super 8 is a love letter to the kind of films Spielberg was producing and directing during the early 1980s (E.T. and The Goonies immediately come to mind, though there are a host of other influences). While Abrams doesn’t quite match the best of the films it imitates, it nonetheless proves an engaging, touching cinematic homage.

Facts of the Case
The year is 1979, and the place is a small town in Ohio. Our central figure is Joe Lamb (Joel Courtney), a small-town middle school student whose mother passed away just a few months ago. Joe’s father Jackson (Kyle Chandler, Friday Night Lights) has become emotionally distant and buried himself in work since the accident, so Joe spends most of his time hanging out with his best friend Charles (Riley Griffiths). Charles is working on creating a low-budget zombie movie for a short film festival, and Joe is in charge of the make-up and special effects. The cast and crew is almost entirely comprised of boys, though Charles somehow talked the popular Alice Dainard (Elle Fanning, Somewhere) into playing the film’s love interest.

On one night of filming, two important things happen. The first is that Joe begins to make a connection with Alice and starts to develop feelings for her. The second is that a massive train wreck occurs nearby during the middle of filming. It quickly becomes apparent that this was no ordinary accident; the military swoops into town and refuses to give anyone even the most basic bits of information. Unusual things start happening: power outages occur all over town, dogs disappear and then people start to go missing. Joe, Charles, Alice and the gang are understandably eager to figure out what’s going on. What they don’t realize that they already have a remarkable piece of evidenced captured on film.

The Evidence
I think that’s enough information on the film’s plot. Many reviews have revealed even more than that, but the true nature of the train wreck is best left a surprise, I think. What makes Super 8 an unexpected pleasure is not the sci-fi wildness Abrams has up his sleeve, but the simple fact that this is the rare summer blockbuster which actually emphasizes character and story over action set pieces and special effects. While it doesn’t offer the same sort of gleeful adrenaline rush Abrams’ Star Trek offered, it does muster up some of that distinctly Spielbergian warmth and emotional intensity which doesn’t appear frequently enough these days.

The film’s best scenes are those which simply allow the young protagonists to interact with each other, as there’s a wonderful sense of group chemistry that’s far more thrilling than any special effect the film has to offer. Seeing this tale unfold through the eyes of these kids brings refreshing perspective to a plot that sometimes seems like an ungainly patchwork quilt of other sci-fi films. When Abrams checks in on the adults (not too frequently, I’m glad to report), we suddenly realize what a dull movie this could have been if it had been centered on a grim, no-nonsense local hero like the character Kyle Chandler plays. An adult looks at the train wreck and thinks, “This is a horrible tragedy.” The kids look at the train wreck and think the same thing, but the next day they conclude that the wrecked train would make a spectacular background for that zombie movie they’re working on. You get the idea.

There are moments between Joe and Alice which approach greatness, as Abrams offers an achingly tender portrait of adolescent longing. Consider the scene in which Joe sees Alice in zombie make-up, and Alice playfully shuffles towards him in a zombie-like fashion. Sure, she’s pretending she wants to eat him, but Joe is simply thrilled by the notion that Alice is offering such a blatant display of interest in him. Some of the young cast members have no significant previous experience, but there’s never an inauthentic moment or forced line reading during the scenes with the youngsters (most of them run circles around grown-up pros like Chandler and Noah Emmerich, but that’s partially because Abrams puts so much work into the characterization of the kids and so little into the adults).

The film starts to disappoint in its second half, as Abrams’ story starts to slip into more conventional territory (it’s handled well enough and is still engaging, but the sense of freshness that dominates the first half starts to fade considerably). It would be a solid slam-bang second half to many films, but it disappoints in this case due to the remarkable nature of the film’s first half. There are plenty of splendid moments throughout the entire film, but less of them once the characters really start running, jumping, chasing and shooting. At least things end on a strong note, as Abrams builds to a finale that ranks as his most explicit homage to Mr. Spielberg (interestingly enough, another film released earlier this year paid homage to Spielberg in a very similar but vastly less effective manner). The genius of Abrams’ conclusion is that it takes familiar imagery and turns it upside down; this has happened before but the context has changed dramatically. It’s also during these closing moments that Abrams indulges in his riskiest moments of emotional manipulation. Fortunately, they pay off due to the work Abrams has put into the build-up to them.

Closing Statement
While Super 8 isn’t quite the masterpiece it flirts with being on occasion, it’s an exceptional film which proves far more emotionally involving than the usual popcorn movie fare. Don’t miss it.

The Verdict
8/10

Never Jane Eyre

OPENING: 03/11/2010

STUDIO: Focus Features

RUN TIME:115 min

ACCOMPLICES:
Trailer, Official Site

The Charge
Return to Thornfield.

Opening Statement
Charlotte Bronte’s classic novel has endured as a mainstay on many reading lists and has only been gaining in popularity. Since 1910, it has surprisingly produced 18 different film versions, not to mention 8 more adaptations for television. Over the years people, including my wife, have been eagerly awaiting a definitive version. This newest adaptation is directed by Cary Joji Fukunaga who is best known so far for his breakthrough debut, Sin Nombre. Hearing that makes one unsure if he is the right fit for such a project that is not only a period piece, but also an epic and beloved tale. However, upon further inspection, similarities arise. Both stories explore what it means to have a family, or lack thereof, while dealing with loss and the search for a better life. So in that respect, maybe Cary was perfectly suited after all to showcase this beautiful story.

Facts of the Case
The novel, to which the film holds a firm but playful grasp, begins with Jane as a child who is orphaned and raised by her cruel aunt. She is sent away to Lowood, a boarding school where life continues to be harsh and strict. Her only consolation is another girl with whom she becomes best friends. Unfortunately, this too does not last, and when Jane is old enough to leave, she strikes off on her own to become a governess at Thornfield Hall. Here, her life improves significantly and she soon meets the master of this manor, Edward Rochester. Dark and impassioned, he becomes intrigued by Jane, and against formalities requests her presence often. Jane privately falls in love with him, all the while believing there is no chance he would ever return the affection. At this isolated and imposing estate, Jane soon learns there is more than meets the eye, and when she discovers Rochester’s closely guarded secret, her life is turned upside down, and she flees into the unknown. She finally ends up at the house of the family Rivers, where the three siblings take her in and find her a job. Years go by as she desperately tries to forget Rochester but her longing heart cannot be quieted. Over the mysterious moor, she hears him calling her name and driven by her inextinguishable love, she searches him out.

The Evidence
Since the story of Jane Eyre has been around long enough to be in the public domain, I credit the screenwriter, Moira Buffini, with infusing this old story with so much freshness and life. The basic story of where she came from and who she becomes is necessary to set a foundation, but it’s not where the excitement comes from. The real story begins when Jane, played by Mia Wasikowska from the new Alice in Wonderland, gets to Thornfield and ultimately meets Rochester, who is masterfully played by Michael Fassbender (from Inglourious Basterds and coming soon in X-Men: First Class). While this story has various themes, it has love at its core, and it’s too easy for a romantic drama that spans so much time to get carried away with the grandeur of an epic (i.e. The English Patient). Yet Buffini knew exactly what to keep from the book and what to edit down, keeping the story from becoming convoluted or stagnant. In a stroke of brilliance, Buffini starts the film in the middle when Jane flees Thornfield. We then see her bleak childhood as a series of flashbacks instead of a melancholy first act. This also allows the viewer the chance to know all the characters up front, including and especially the Rivers siblings who come in at the third act, when an audience doesn’t necessarily want to meet new people. With this vivid new beginning, you first see the tension and fear that Jane exhibits as she runs, and after seeing the situation second time around in the movie, you can feel it with her.

Surprisingly this movie is very reminiscent of another classic tale, Alfred Hitchcock’s Rebecca. Those of you familiar with this best picture winner will have a bit of a spoiler for Jane Eyre, but here goes anyway. Both movies feature a young woman who is supposedly plain and ordinary, and therefore doesn’t think anyone could ever love her. Along comes a dashing, experienced older man who is bored with vapid, beautiful women and cannot resist this young creature with an otherworldly presence about her. Both stories have their version of an obstacle in a sinister secret that threatens their fragile relationship. Interestingly, both estates contain this threat, leaving only one possible ending if the two soulmates can ever be together. Where Jane Eyre differs is the focus, this title character has a future (with or without Rochester), while Rebecca’s title character is in the past. We know the strength of Jane because of our journey through her life, so we are more invested in her character.

The location that was chosen for the film couldn’t have been more perfect. There was once a private house in that specific area of Derbyshire in England that is thought to have inspired Bronte in writing about Thornfield, and the filmmakers were able to take advantage of the natural yet impressive surrounding landscapes. All of the atmosphere worked easily into Cary’s idea of bringing out a gothic tone in the film. The novel describes the ominous and haunting look of Thornfield and they were able to capture all the mystery that the manor was shrouded in.

There was an interesting supporting role of Mrs. Fairfax, the housekeeper of Thornfield, played by Judi Dench. Normally we are accustomed to seeing her in dominant roles of power or control, whether playing M from the James Bond series or the queen of England. So, to see her in a position where she was being ordered about is contrary to what we know of her. I’m not sure if this was faulty casting or if the filmmakers were trying to bring a sense of dignity to the role of the Mrs. Fairfax, the housekeeper who was alluded to being a distant relative to Rochester. Either way it was odd at first, but still a pleasure to watch.

After seeing Michael Fassbender in Hunger and Centurion, I knew he could magnificently carry a film. Now it seems he has cemented a place to stay, and is definitely the upcoming actor to watch. The scenes he had with Mia, and specifically the dialogue involved, were so poignant since there were only few moments the two had to convey their emotion. Mia in her own right played the “manic pixie dream girl” well as the inspiration to lift Rochester out of the depths and into the light.

Closing Statement
My wife loved this film immensely, and if you couldn’t tell, while I am not its target audience, I loved it too. The care taken over each aspect, each shot, each detail made it easy to fall for. It was vivid, beautiful and complex, like the story and even Jane herself. Such tales can be trite and over told, and it has been so long since we’ve seen romance on the screen. It takes us going back to the classics to remember what we’ve forgotten, the power that comes with love. In the end, you understand the need that both characters had for each other, and the only home they longed for was fulfilled in one another.

The Verdict

9/10

Unknown

OPENING: 02/18/2011

STUDIO: Warner Bros.

RUN TIME: 113 min

ACCOMPLICES:
Trailer, Official Site

The Charge
Take back your life.

Opening Statement
The Liam Neeson action/thriller Taken proved a surprising box office smash, so it’s only natural that Neeson should attempt to duplicate that success. The similarly-marketed Unknown often looks and feels like Taken (both feature Neeson on a frantic personal mission in Europe), but proves to be a less compelling and much less satisfying motion picture.

Facts of the Case
Neeson plays Dr. Martin Harris, an American traveling with his wife Elizabeth (January Jones, Mad Men) to a conference in Germany. On the way to the conference, Martin is in a terrible car accident. He is rescued by an illegal immigrant named Gina (Diane Kruger, Inglourious Basterds) and taken to a hospital, where he remains in a coma for four days. Upon waking up, Martin is suffering from partial amnesia. He knows that his name is Martin Harris, that he is married to a woman named Elizabeth and that he is in Germany on business, but beyond that the details are very hazy.

Martin is quickly able to track Elizabeth down, but she acts as if she doesn’t recognize him. Making matters more confusing is the fact that another man (Aidan Quinn, Legends of the Fall) is claiming to be Dr. Harris. Determined to figure out what’s going on, Martin enlists the services of both Gina and a private investigator (Bruno Ganz, Wings of Desire). As he gets closer and closer to unraveling the mystery, the level of danger increases. Will Martin find out what happened to his identity before it’s too late?

The Evidence
Though the trailers for Unknown didn’t exactly get me excited, I was willing to give those involved the benefit of the doubt. After all, Liam Neeson’s forceful turn in Taken permitted that film to transcend its generic plot and rampant xenophobia. I also enjoyed Orphan, the unapologetically tasteless horror flick from Unknown director Jaume Collet-Serra. Alas, Collet-Serra should have brought some of that fearless crazy to this film, which offers a considerably tamer, much less entertaining brand of silliness.

There was a man sitting behind me in the theatre; chatting to himself throughout the movie. From scene to scene, the man would say something to effect of, “and now this is going to happen, and this person is going to react this way.” This sort of behavior is generally annoying, though it’s worth noting that his guesses mirrored my own and he was right on the money every single time. Despite its twisty-turny nature and mysterious premise, Unknown is so obviously directed and written that it tips its hand at every turn. The film goes through the usual motions of a thriller, but never thrills because we’re always a couple steps ahead of it.

The film bears a passing resemblance to a great many action movies, and a more striking resemblance to Roman Polanski’s Frantic. That film offered a great deal of cinematic polish that made the whole affair engaging, plus just enough off-key absurdity to keep us on our toes. Part of what made the movie work so well is that Polanski and actor Harrison Ford skillfully kept the film’s emotional core at the surface. It’s hard to care much about anyone in Unknown, particularly since there is such a strong possibility that Martin Harris isn’t actually Martin Harris. Since we aren’t really sure of who anyone is or what their motivations are, we can’t get too invested in them. That notion is not necessarily a film-killer, but the movie needed to be smart and involving enough on other levels to compensate for the lack of any emotional pull. It isn’t, as Collet-Serra’s direction is pedestrian and the script lacks any flavor or inventive ideas.

Neeson does what he can with the material, but at times he seems more frustrated by the narrow range of his scenes than he does the plight of his character. Still, his earlier scenes in which he essays a concerned, amnesia-ridden husband play more persuasively than his later scenes as a one-liner-quipping action hero. January Jones and Aidan Quinn have little to do, while Diane Kruger’s respectable performance is often shoved into the background. The actors faring the best are old pros Bruno Ganz and Frank Langella (Frost/Nixon), who share the film’s one genuinely worthwhile scene. It’s a lovely moment which suggests a film more thoughtful and intriguing than the one we’re watching.

Closing Statement
Though not an incompetent film or even the worst Neeson has done lately (it’s more enjoyable than Joe Carnahan’s terrible The A-Team, at least), Unknown is a disappointingly dull waste of time. Do yourself a favor and rent Frantic instead.

The Verdict
5/10

The Way Back

OPENING: 1/21/2011

STUDIO: Exclusive Films

RUN TIME: 133m

ACCOMPLICES:
Trailer, Official Site

The Charge
Their escape was just the beginning

Opening Statement
From long time established director Peter Weir comes The Way Back, the story of gulag escapees whose goal is to walk to freedom. While this film isn’t as well constructed as some of Weir’s other works (e.g. Witness, The Truman Show), The Way Back holds it own in the escape-from-jail genre of films. The film could have been tighter and even better written at times, but still manages to entertain to the end.

Facts of the Case
Polish resident Janusz is accused of spying against the communist Soviet Union and Stalin’s regime. After refusing to sign a confession, he is sent to a Soviet labor camp where he is to serve the next twenty years of his life. Janusz quickly learns that no man can survive twenty years in such a camp and immediately befriends other inmates with a plan to escape. During the most furious of winter storms, a group of seven break free and head into the mountains, thus beginning the harrowing 4,000 mile journey from Siberia to India.

The Evidence
Unlike the classic The Great Escape, a film which focuses more on the actual escape from a WWII prison camp, The Way Back, on the other hand, spends little time in the prison and spends the great majority of the film on the journey. The amount of time spent in the camp is simply enough to introduce characters and show the viewers ample reason why the convicted wish to escape. The prisoners sleep several to a bunk, get very little food, and work in the most extreme conditions during a harsh Siberian winter. Those who resist working in the outdoor climates are subject to the mines, which is a hell with dangers of its own. The main character, Janusz, can see quite clearly that life inside the gulag is no life at all. With inmates dying right and left, Janusz must find a way out if he is to survive to see his wife again.

“Nature is your jailer and she is without mercy.”

These words, spoken by the Soviet officer greeting the new inmates, are a verbal warning should they even try to escape, Mother Nature will undoubtedly take each of them down. With literally hundreds of miles of forest in every direction, the survival rate for escapees is zero. Weir does a masterful job of showing the brutality of winter in Siberia. Food is almost nonexistent and every day brings new challenges as the inmates walk in the same direction, hoping to reach some sort of freedom. Weir brilliantly juxtaposes the beauty of the untouched forest against the relentless winter conditions. Overhead camera shots give the forest a feeling of claustrophobia, with trees spaced only feet apart for miles in any direction. The camera might linger over a hill only to see a seemingly endless range of mountains in the distance.

After the survivors reach the southern tip of the Siberian wilderness, the landscape changes considerably and within a relatively short distance they find themselves on the edge of the Gobi Desert. The desert brings new challenges to the remaining group and death quickly becomes the more pleasurable alternative to those whose hope has completely diminished. With countless, enormous sand dunes rivaling that of Tatooine, the escapees walk day after day, night after night, with little to drink and even less to eat. Weir spends half of the film in the desert, and although we better understand this excruciatingly arduous part of the journey for the travelers, I found this to be where the film itself began to drag. At some point, the long distance shots of people walking across the desert became tedious and the film could have benefited from more footage showing the toll that the desert takes on the human body. This is touched on briefly, but more of this would alleviate the need for so many walking shots. During one of these walking shots, a glaring continuity error fills the screen, catching the attention of both my wife and me. Thankfully, the picture eventually reaches its climax and ties itself up rather quickly, almost too quickly, with survivors immediately disappearing from the story simply to focus on Janusz’ original plight.

A few choices in the screenplay could have used better explanation; one scene which struck me as rather sloppy involved the group as they walked along the edge of Baikal Lake. For some unclear reason, the group decides that they must swim across a section of the lake, which is visibly frozen in parts. Weir never established why the group must swim across the near freezing water instead of walking around the lake as they had been doing. In fact, the distance they do maneuver across is quite short, so not going around this section of the lake seems highly illogical on the part of the characters. Another unexplained goal is why the journeymen insist on getting to India, instead of hopping on the Trans-Siberian railroad heading east. Possibly, the railway is too heavily patrolled by invading forces, but that is never explained and with the great distances they have already hiked, hitching a ride on a train, even if for fifty miles, would prove to be quite a relief.

The Way Back is loosely based on The Long Walk, a book by Slawomir Rawicz chronicling his 4,000 mile walk after escaping prison. This story, although selling a half a million copies, has since been debunked on several levels and is questioned as to its truthfulness in storytelling. While stretching the truth has very often provided for great storytelling, that doesn’t excuse Weir from making the film as air-tight as possible.

Closing Statement
In the end, The Way Back is an entertaining film, but not as well constructed as it could have been. The long 132 minute running time becomes quite evident in the second half and with a tighter section in the desert, it might have been more satisfying. Still, Peter Weir has a knack for photographing the beauty in nature’s many landscapes, even when those same landscapes bring death to those who can’t overcome its indifference toward human life.

The Verdict

6/10

The Housemaid

OPENING: 01/28/2011

STUDIO: IFC Films

RUN TIME:106 min

ACCOMPLICES:
Trailer, Official Site

The Charge
When opportunity knocks, answer at your own risk.

Opening Statement
The Housemaid is a remake of a 1960 film, both made in Korea, both with the same name. The original was a hit, both with audiences and with critics. It is now considered a masterpiece of its genre, although I’m not sure if it’s to the degree of Citizen Kane or more to the degree of Head. Kim Ki-Young, the director of the original, brought a different aesthetic to Korean film than had been seen before. His work influenced many of the big Korean directors known today, such as Park Chan-Wook and Bong Joon-Ho. I have not seen the original but if it is as good as I’m hearing it is, I can’t believe that news of this remake was met with much applause. And, after seeing the remake, unless the original had as big of a question mark at the end of it, I also can’t believe that this film will make many of the fans of the original film very happy.

Facts of the Case
Eun-yi (Jeon Do-youn) is a young woman who is taken from her job in a noodle shop and hired as an upper class family housemaid to take care of the house and the family’s small daughter, Hanyeo (Ahn Seo-hyun) and very pregnant wife, Hae-ra (Seo Woo). There is an older housemaid, Byung-sik (Yoon Yeo-Jung) who chose, hired and is teaching Eun-yi the ropes while simultaneously hoping and strategizing for her to fail. The head of the household is Hoon (Lee Jung-jae). He has been brought up in a privileged family and has never had anything denied him. As such he quickly takes advantage of his position and slips into the new housemaid’s bed. From there the story, as any like this tends to, gets complicated.

The Evidence
Most of this film plays like any “upstairs, downstairs”, the rich vs. the poor story. All the power and opulence that those with money can flounce about is shown here. The cars they drive, the vacation homes they spend time in, the large estate they live on, the wine they drink and even the way they drink it, all go to show just how much they are at a disconnect from the women who prepare their meals and raise their children. The typical rules of what is right and wrong do not apply to them because they were not raised with such ideas. The thoughts of bumping off someone who might be causing you a bit of inconvenience or paying for someone’s silence and cooperation is as common to their thinking as breathing itself. It really is not a new thought to be placed on film, and here, not much new is said. The only person in this family who is not yet affected by these paralyzing notions is the young daughter, who speaks like a grown woman and is the most level headed of the entire bunch. The little actress who played her is amazing to watch, mostly because such a big performance comes from where it is not expected.

Everything was going pretty much according to plan then it was as if the director could not figure out how to wrap this tale up and said, “Screw it!” Truly it is disheartening that he did so. He took what could have been a solid little drama and ruined it by making the ending the only thing I can really focus on. It’s like being on a date with a good-looking, articulate, witty and fun-spirited person who has a mole on his face with a crop of 4-inch hairs growing out of it. No matter how much you want to and how hard you try, your focus always comes back to the mole. As I left the building after watching this film, the ending was the only thing that I or anyone else in my party could talk about, and not in a “Wasn’t that awesome!” way, more in the “What the heck was that?” kinda way. Even now, rethinking through the last two scenes in the film, the bile builds in me because what was not an artsy film took an artsy turn without rhyme or reason, and so the rest of the picture just pales into the background. All the solid performances by the entire cast, all the great shots accentuating the majesty of the set that they built to film in, all the brilliance of the style and look the cinematographer was able to achieve, get relegated to footnotes.

Closing Statement
My reaction may be a bit too much, but to me a solid finish is everything. You have to bring the story home, finish with conviction. If not then everything that has come before it means nothing. Conversely, a weak story may be raised to a good story by an amazing ending. The problem with people is that they’d rather be happy than good. To analyze is to lose respect, or awe, for. The more you learn, the less you know. Never dress up for a food fight. Handle yourself with your head; handle others with your heart. Actions speak louder then words but motives can out scream actions every time. Behind every good man is someone telling him the answers. If you really want to understand me, please hear what I’m not saying, what I may never be able to say. See, kinda crap, huh?

The Verdict

6/10

Nora’s Will

OPENING: 10/08/2010 (Selected cities)

STUDIO: Cacerola Films

RUN TIME: 92m

ACCOMPLICES:
Trailer, Official Site

The Charge
Can’t we just get along?

Opening Statement
Originally titled 5 Days Without Nora, this Mexican sensation has received several awards in its own country, but has gone relatively unnoticed in the U.S. Nora’s Will is a bittersweet drama about a man forced to look at his own character and how he affects the people around him. The film is tender, touching, and has a good share of laughs to break up the dark tone.

Facts of the Case
Jose delivers groceries to the home of his ex-wife of twenty years Nora, only to learn that she has just committed suicide. Because of Jewish practices during the time of Passover, Nora must be buried that day or wait nearly five days until after Passover to do so. Since their son Ruben and his family is away, Jose chooses to wait and thus begins his babysitting of the body. Jose, aggravated by the religious practices of those around him, soon learns that the burial will not be a simple matter, since Jewish customs forbid suicide victims from being buried in a normal fashion. This is a major inconvenience to the mourning family, who want nothing more than to find a resting place for the body. Jose wants a quick and easy ceremony, but his apathetic beliefs conflict with those around him. Ironically, this is all part of Nora’s will, to bring the family together, even if in a time of sadness.

The Evidence
Although Nora’s Will is the debut film by Mexican filmmaker Mariana Chenillo, the film is far from dead and lifeless as the Facts of the Case might suggest. Chenillo takes the familiar premise of the troubled family and creates a warm and tender story, told with much emotion and never hurried. The film begins with Nora carefully setting up the table for what we can see will be an elaborate Passover meal. Every utensil is perfectly aligned and the china is the utmost quality, showing the meticulous nature of a character who will soon be absent from the rest of the picture. Shortly after the table is ready, Nora swallows several bottles of pills, thus ending her own life before the beginning of the Passover celebration. This is no coincidence, as Nora knew that her own death would force the family together. Well, for at least a little while. Within hours, Nora’s home is flooded with relatives, friends, and people from various walks of life there to assist Jose in what he believes should be an easy task. What becomes difficult is the juggling of beliefs and traditions between the numerous people under one roof.

Nora’s Will is a drama rich in depth and personality, but also has a fair amount of black comedy spread throughout. This comes from the wide array of characters present in the script. We have the nearly blind Aunt Leah; Jewish man Moises, who has been sent to pray over the body of Nora but is not quite ready for the irreverence of Jose; and Fabiana, the housekeeper, whose Catholic beliefs conflict with just about everyone else’s. In the middle of it all is Jose, an atheist, who in old age has become quite grumpy and has no problem going great lengths to offend others. When a local rabbi comes to the house with other Jewish followers to help with arrangements, Jose orders a pizza with extra ham, bacon, and sausage. This, of course, is more than insulting to the rabbi, who leaves upset, much to the amusement of Jose.

Jose’s actions aren’t without repercussions, as soon he finds himself an outsider in the family, since his actions are doing nothing to help an already painful situation. Jose insists that “everything she did was just to manipulate us” and hates to see Nora in any control of his surroundings, even after her death. The others, unconcerned with Jose’s selfish attitude, are looking for closure to the tragedy, a tragedy Jose is an unwilling participant in. Jose is ripe in age and believes what he believes, but he is finally beginning to recognize how his actions and words are causing pain to those around him. It took the death of someone important for Jose learn about some of the basics in life — respect, forgiveness, and compromise.

Nora’s Will is a pleasant film with wonderful characters and for a film that centers around a dead body, I found myself laughing a number of times. Nora’s Will could be loosely compared to Alfred Hitchcock’s classic The Trouble With Harry, another dark comedy centered around a dead body, but at no time did that film take itself seriously. Nora’s Will not only takes itself seriously, but brings up questions that many struggle with. How do we to get along with people of other worldviews? In what ways do our beliefs directly affect others around us? We can’t ignore that there are fundamental differences between us, but we still have to somehow live together. I won’t pretend that the film answers those questions or even pretends to, but what the film does accomplish is quite clear. It presents the story of a man, a flawed man, like you or me, and how he might deal with those same questions. How we answer those questions….well, that’s for you to figure out.

Closing Statement
The screenplay itself is rich with tangible characters and the story gets to the heart of issues that people will undoubtedly ask themselves at one time or another. If a dark, comedic drama is what you are yearning to see, Nora’s Will should serve you well. It isn’t a film I would see several times, but it was worth seeing once and I would recommend it to those looking for a uniquely warm and touching film experience.

The Verdict

7/10

Blue Valentine

OPENING: 12/29/2010

STUDIO: The Weinstein Company

RUN TIME: 112 min

ACCOMPLICES:
Trailer, Official Site

The Charge
Nobody baby but you and me.

Opening Statement
You always hurt the ones you love
The ones you shouldn’t hurt at all
You always take the sweetest rose
And crush it till the petals fall…

Facts Of The Case
Dean (Ryan Gosling, The Notebook) and Cindy (Michelle Williams, Brokeback Mountain) are a working-class couple living in Brooklyn, coping with the fact the love they once held for each other has drained completely. In a last-ditch attempt to combat the coldness and rekindle their communication, Dean insists Cindy join him for a night of drinking and sex in a sleazy motel. As we experience what may be the final hours of their marriage, we concurrently watch flashbacks of how the couple met, fell in love, and dodged numerous hurdles to eventually be together and raise a daughter.

The Evidence
Few movies are as equally beautiful and devastating as Blue Valentine. Yet, the MPAA “slapped” the picture with the dreaded NC-17 rating for on the level, yet incredibly pertinent, sex scenes with Gosling and Williams. Surely, the MPAA didn’t expect the retaliation by prolific producers Bob and Harvey Weinstein, who’ve been championing the film ever since the ecstatic praise it received at the Sundance Film Festival. The film was finally awarded an R rating in early December; for once, the Hollywood community backed the producers during the appeal stage, culminating in a unanimous vote by the MPAA to have the rating overturned. Hopefully this precious jewel of a movie has sent them a message to grow up.

Writer-director Derek Cianfrance, whose previous efforts were limited to shorts and documentaries, had been working on Blue Valentine for almost twelve years. That’s right, twelve years! Even after Gosling and Williams signed up, Cianfrance couldn’t find funding until his script (which he co-wrote with Cami DeLavigne and Joey Curtis), won the Chrysler Film Project, awarding him a million dollars to fund this labor of love. What they all achieve with Blue Valentine is something of a miracle; like Before Sunrise/Sunset and Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind, this is that ultra-rare love story that completely avoids formula and clichés, instead opting to meditate on what exactly goes wrong after the rings go on the fingers. Indeed, the storytelling may be too much for some genre-fans to mentally grasp—particularly teenagers who prefer by-the-numbers, uncomplicated fare like Dear John and the Twilight flicks. Then again, Blue Valentine wasn’t made for them, but for adults; indeed, it’s truly refreshing to watch a love story written with maturity as well as heart.

How Cianfrance and his stars made Blue Valentine is quite remarkable, actually. Despite the screenwriting credits, much of the dialogue was improvised by Gosling and Williams, all the while living in the same Brooklyn house with their on-screen daughter. They first shot the flashback sequences, showcasing the growing love between Dean and Cindy, all in single takes; the actors celebrated birthdays, Christmas and even got pictures taken as if they were a real family. Two scenes in the flashbacks are particularly noteworthy: the moment where Dean plays a ukulele and sings “You Only Hurt The Ones You Love” (which also serves as the trailer), and the bittersweet scene on the train after Dean promises to rescue Cindy from her predicament and take care of her. Once Gosling and Williams got to the scenes where the marriage is crumbling, however, they had to destroy everything—all the memories, passions, and romance had to, essentially, be ripped to shreds via sheer performance.

All throughout this time, Cianfrance shows complete confidence behind the camera, alternating between film and digital to convey the different time periods. (However most will tell the time shifts by Gosling’s appearance.) Whether you are supposed to love or hate Dean and Cindy isn’t the point; Cianfrance is primarily concerned about establishing specific moods and then giving the actors complete autonomy. (Wisely, Cianfrance never, not once, judges these characters or takes sides.) Cianfrance was also extremely careful in how he approached the numerous sex scenes; some pulsate with pleasure, others with melancholy. The director’s style may be reminiscent of filmmakers like Ingmar Bergman and John Cassavetes, yet he still creates his own cinematic voice. There’s something deeply, achingly personal about Blue Valentine. And the drama is only enhanced by the wonderful music, courtesy of Brooklyn folk rock group Grizzly Bear.

As for the performances by Gosling and Williams, prepare yourself. Calling them both astonishing would be an understatement, as they channel their feelings and emotions with a brutal, almost unbearable intensity. Ryan Gosling admirably downplays the heartthrob status he generated after The Notebook; in recent years, he’s leaned towards more challenging, non-commercial material such as Lars And The Real Girl and Half-Nelson, netting an Oscar nomination for the latter. Gosling goes through a virtual transformation, leading to an explosion in the last half-hour, which will floor even his most adoring fans. (Warning: those final moments will surely strike uncomfortably familiar chords among many couples.)

While watching Michelle Williams, it’s difficult not to think about what she has endured in the past three years. Shooting was originally slated to begin in early 2008, but Cianfrance opted to wait a year or so while Williams spent some time with her daughter in the wake of Heath Ledger’s tragic death. However, she’s been determined to do this part for the better part of a decade, ever since she read the script back in 2001. As with Gosling, she disappears into this character, and exhibits a genuine sweetness in the flashbacks which is impossible to resist. And, again like Gosling, it’s heartbreakingly clear how much she’s changed when you watch her in the present, particularly in the motel room sequences. Gosling and Williams committed their minds, hearts, and souls to the project, and it shows in every single frame. Blue Valentine is worth seeing for them alone, period.

Closing Statement
It’s been days since I left the theatre, yet my heart is still broken. Blue Valentine is an unforgettable, Oscar-worthy film with two of the finest performances I’ve ever seen. Whether you go see this in the theater or wait for it on DVD, it should not be missed. Plus, keep an eye on Derek Cianfrance, as his future output will be eagerly anticipated.

The Verdict
10/10

The Other Woman

OPENING: 02/04/2011

STUDIO: Incentive Film

RUN TIME: 119 min

ACCOMPLICES:
Trailer, IMDb

The Charge
Love Makes Everything Possible

Opening Statement
After spending more than a year collecting dust on the shelf, Don Roos’ The Other Woman is finally getting a proper release. While it isn’t the stinker some have suspected it to be, the film doesn’t quite manage to capitalize on its potential.

Facts of the Case
Emilia Greenleaf (Natalie Portman, V for Vendetta) meets Jack (Scott Cohen, Kissing Jessica Stein) at the law firm where they both work. Jack’s married, but that doesn’t stop the two of them from falling madly in love. A couple of months later, Emilia reveals that she is pregnant. Without hesitation, Jack leaves his wife Carolyne (Lisa Kudrow, Friends) and marries Emilia.

Fast forward a year or so. Emilia is now attempting to cope with the tragic loss of her infant child (the baby died only three days after birth) and working to establish a successful relationship with her eight-year-old step-son (Charlie Tahan, Charlie St. Cloud). Unfortunately, finding a way to make her life and relationships work in the wake of her loss proves immensely challenging.

The Evidence
It’s not hard to see why The Other Woman was sitting on the shelf for a while. The film itself has some genuine merit, but it deals with material a bit too heavy for the mainstream yet lacks the depth and artistry required to succeed with the arthouse crowd. A window of opportunity appeared with the release of Darren Aronofsky’s highly-regarded Black Swan, as The Other Woman leapt at the chance to cash in on Portman’s surging popularity before her numerous other 2011 releases had a chance to do so. Intriguing as all of this is, let’s set aside these complications and consider the film itself.

The Other Woman is arguably a film with more virtues than flaws, but I can’t stop thinking about how much better it could have been if it had been a little bolder and less conventional. The first area that comes to mind is the way the relationship between Emilia, Jack and Carolyne is handled. The situation is a messy one, as a married man is leaving his wife for a younger woman. The film briefly acknowledges the inevitable pangs of guilt that come with such a scenario, but it cleans up any conflicted feelings we may have by tipping the scales in a rather shameless manner.

Kudrow’s Carolyne is presented as a horrific monster of a woman; an awful human being in almost every regard. She tears up the picture her son drew in school. She tells her son that Emilia’s dead child, “wasn’t a real person, anyway.” She spews venomous bile almost every time she appears. No one could ever fault a man for leaving such a woman, but this ugly characterization undercuts the nuance the film hints at exploring. What a bold stroke it would have been to make Carolyne an intelligent, reasonable, decent woman. It’s said early on that she and her husband had grown somewhat distant from each other–that would have been sufficient reason for the break-up. By turning Carolyne into a villain, the film dismisses the fact that Jack is basically trading in his 40-something wife for a younger model.

There’s another area that I have to approach with a little more caution, as I want to avoid spoilers. Midway through the film, Emilia provides Jack with a startling piece of information. The scene in which this happens in the film’s most gutwrenching moment; a heartbreaking revelation that takes The Other Woman into deep, dark territory. Unfortunately, a handful of moments in the film’s final 15 minutes or so work hard to undermine the strength of this scene, eventually draining it of its devastating power. The scene midway through prevents the film from being regarded as fluff; the later scenes assure that many will regard it as unsubstantial.

I could list a handful of other irksome issues, but most of the problems are essentially variations on the same tune: the film flits back and forth between uncomfortable complexity and easily digestible convention. As such, my reaction is similarly conflicted. The film ultimately proved an unsatisfying experience for me, as I felt it could have and should have been more than it is. Even so, in a number of ways the movie is so much better than films which actually worked for me because they succeeded in fulfilling their relatively small ambitions. Secretariat works for me and The Other Woman doesn’t, but I’d rather watch The Other Woman a second time. You know what I mean.

At the very least, I feel no need to qualify my praise for Ms. Portman, whose fine performance is the film’s most consistently compelling element. It’s a quiet, introspective role containing a great deal of emotional subtlety, and Portman sells some difficult moments with conviction. She really shines during her interactions with young Charlie Tahan, who also creates a distinctive character that manages to avoid the usual “precocious kid” clichés. Unfortunately, the rest of the cast suffers to varying degrees. Kudrow’s solid work is ruined by the terrible writing, while Scott Cohen is endlessly bland in his poorly defined role. The sidekick characters played by Lauren Ambrose (Six Feet Under) and Anthony Rapp (Rent) seem to have been imported in from a low-rent romantic comedy.

Closing Statement
The Other Woman is best suited to viewers who appreciate understated, thoughtful filmmaking. Unfortunately, such viewers are also the most likely to take issue with the film’s flaws.

The Verdict
6/10